Quick Navigation
Topics
Trapped Ion Quantum Computing
Quantum Simulation
Bit-flip errors in dissipative cat qubits: second-order perturbation theory
arXiv
Authors: Kirill S. Dubovitskii
Year
2024
Paper ID
65024
Status
Preprint
Abstract Read
~2 min
Abstract Words
112
Citations
N/A
Abstract
Dissipative cat qubits are known for the exponential suppression of the bit-flip rate. However, there is significant discrepancy between experimental measurements and analytical predictions of the strength of the bit-flip suppression. In this paper we resolve this discrepancy for some of the perturbations, by developing a second-order perturbation theory on top of a nonlinear dissipative Lindbladian. Following this scheme, we derive an analytical expression for the exponentially small bit-flip rate due to single-photon loss, which shows good agreement with numerical simulations. We also apply our scheme to other perturbations, such as frequency detuning and the Z gate, and find the corresponding bit-flip rates, which also show good agreement with the numerical simulation.
Why This Paper Matters
- This paper contributes to the Quantum Simulation research area in the Quantum Articles archive.
- It adds a 2024 reference point for readers tracking recent quantum research.
- Dissipative cat qubits are known for the exponential suppression of the bit-flip rate.
Paper Tools
Become a member to use research tools
Sign in to open papers, visit source links, share, cite, compare, copy DOI links, request category corrections, and build your reading list.
Show Paper arXiv Publisher Share
Cite This Paper
Copy URL
Compare
Copy DOI Add to Reading List
Category Correction Request
Category Correction Request
Help us improve classification quality by proposing a better category. Every request is reviewed by an admin.
Sign in to submit a category correction request for this paper.
Log In to SubmitReferences & Citation Signals
Community Reactions
Quick sentiment from readers on this paper.
Score:
0
Likes: 0
Dislikes: 0
Sign in to react to this paper.
Discussion & Reviews (Moderated)
Average Rating: 0.0 / 5 (0 ratings)
No written reviews yet.